catgate wrote:Over the last week or two I have had several attempts to download Gimp 2.6.xx onto my Ubuntu 10.04 system after "complete removal", by SPM, of my existing abomination rejoicing under the appelation of "Gimp 2.7.2".

Each time, after using various repositories, I always finish up with 2.7.2 back again, despite the fact that to all intents and purposes the item I am supposedly downloading is 2.6.xx.

Surely there must be a way of fishing out of the archives a version of 2.6.xx and popping it onto my machine? Or am I relying on my rose tinted spectacles too much?

You must therefore have enabled the ppa repository for gimp 2.7. possibly http://ppa.launchpad.net/matthaeus123/m ... svn/ubuntu, so when you open synaptic go to Settings ->Repositories Other software tab and look for a selected repository with either that address or another that you don't recognise. You can quickly find out if it's the repository by using the Origin filter in the left hand pane and checking what it contains. Once you've found it deselect that repo and uninstall then reinstall gimp and you'll be back at 2.6.x.

Just for your info, on my test install partition of ubuntu 12.04 (using the gnome-panel-fallback DE) I have installed gimp 2.8. It's great! No problems at all that I have found so far.

Thanks for that, aj. You were correct in your diagnosis. In my frantic ignorance I had used a few different (non-standard) repos and despite my removing Gimp 2.7, before trying to down load 2.6.xx, it was getting replaced from one or other of these sources.I removed them and tried again to load 2.6.8 from the "official" ones (page 1).
It all seemed to go swimmingly, and now SMP shows me that I infact have 2.6.8 onboard. Additionally I was guides to remove SANE and XSANE and replace them which I did.
The outcome is that now although I appear to have the "right" bits when I try to fire up from the Graphics drop down panel all I get is a little arrow circulating clockwise in a small white blob.
I fear I may have done something untoward.

Re the 12.04 test machine ...I too have a Gimp 2.6.xx on mine (don't ask how) and that seems to be fairly begnign. Although I have not used it seriously yet as I am still trying to shift the max/min/close buttons back to where they should be (top right) and so far I have not found a satisfactory trick to give me the result I want.

nelz wrote:They do, Ubuntu routinely use bleeding edge versions, it is based on Debian Testing. If you want tried and tested versions with minimal changes, go for Debian Stable.

Well I'll be %^& *()%%)" &^ $%^& ed!!!!!!

So how does this square up with L.T.S. ?

Now, now, don't be hasty. Debian Testing is not exactly bleeding-edge. Indeed, it is a good deal more staid (and hence stable) than many a run-of-the-mill distro. It just isn't that crusty and stable.

Ubuntu puts a few bleeding-edge rockets under debian Testing. Periodically debian Testing migrates across to Stable - a good candidate for an Ubuntu LTS (though ISTR Canonical have sometimes also provided LTS for an intermediate "frozen" version of Testing).

Mint then makes Ubuntu smoother and shinier - but, fortunately, no less stable. I saw some recent stats that suggest Mint has overtaken Ubuntu as the most popular distro download.

I'll bet there's a distro or two based on Mint somewhere, too.

P.S. Did that comedy technical manager have pointy hair?

"Klinger, do you know how many zoots were killed to make that one suit?" — BJ Hunnicutt, 4077 M*A*S*H

When I look back at your reply I must agree that you indeed did suggest that.
The odd thing is that at the time of reading it I was quite unsure of what you meant, (remember you are dealing with an octogenarian retard!), and only after reading aj's reply, and farting about a little, did I begin to understand.
I have an old lifelong chum who lives (well exists) in a care home up in Guisborough, and the poor chap is paralysed down one side and can only grunt. I shall be coming up to visit him in the next week or two, so I shall call in and you can kick my arse for being thick

I am left with no clue as to what is causing this:-

The outcome is that now, although I appear to have the "right" bits, when I try to fire up, from the Graphics drop down panel, all I get is a little arrow circulating clockwise in a small white blob.I fear I may have done something untoward.

edit:- Correction.
The little arrows that are circulating are not arrows but pulsating ovoids.

Last edited by catgate on Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

When I look back at your reply I must agree that you indeed did suggest that. The odd thing is that at the time of reading it I was quite unsure of what you meant, (remember you are dealing with an octogenarian retard!), and only after reading aj's reply, and farting about a little, did I begin to understand.I have an old lifelong chum who lives (well exists) in a care home up in Guisborough, and the poor chap is paralysed down one side and can only grunt. I shall be coming up to visit him in the next week or two, so I shall call in and you can kick my arse for being thick

I am left with no clue as to what is causing this:-

The outcome is that now, although I appear to have the "right" bits, when I try to fire up, from the Graphics drop down panel, all I get is a little arrow circulating clockwise in a small white blob.I fear I may have done something untoward.

edit:- Correction.The little arrows that are circulating are not arrows but pulsating ovoids.

I'm not sure of its name, but it is siituated on the west side of Northgate near the town end. We drive down the north side of it and into a car park at the rear. It has a large conservatory there.
When we go we are usually guided by his wife, who we pick up from their house just of Hutton Lane. She is riddled with rheum.athrit. poor love.

I also get nothing but admiration for those amongst us who can really understand it.
It appears to me as though this too is trying to cope with a difficult choice.
edit:-
The second line "/usr/lib/libgegl-0.1.so.0" is in blue on my screen.